Unrestricted Access
CONFIDENTIALITY STATUS
Confidential
Restricted Access
Framework for online, flexible and blended learning in
Science and Engineering
PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Version: v.5
Date: 15/04/2010
Document History
Date
Version
08/03/2010
0.4
Section
Author
MFW
15/04/2010
0.5
MFW
Comments
For discussion and comment by T&L
Committee
For approval by T&L Committee
Authorisation
Authority
Name
Author
Mike Williams
Project Manager
Mike Williams
Director (or Equivalent)
Prof Shelley Yeo
Project Sponsor
Prof Robyn Quin,
DVC Education
Signature
Date
Document Management
An electronic copy of this document has been filed on the S&E T&L website
Related Documents
Reference
Title
This document should be completed for complex projects (i.e. projects that exceed $50,000 or 500
person hours, or where there exists significant risk to the University’s business).
File name: Document1
Page 2 of 27
Table of Contents
1
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 5
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
2
ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT ............................................................................................................... 5
BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................... 5
PROJECT SPONSOR ........................................................................................................................ 5
PROJECT MANAGER ...................................................................................................................... 5
KEY STAKEHOLDERS .................................................................................................................... 5
PROJECT SCOPE ............................................................................................................................. 6
2.1
STRATEGIC LINK ........................................................................................................................... 6
2.2
PROJECT BENEFITS ........................................................................................................................ 6
2.3
PROJECT DELIVERABLES............................................................................................................... 6
2.4
PROJECT METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 7
2.4.1
Project Approach (to be revised after Phase 1 of Project) ................................................... 8
2.4.2
Initial milestones and timeline (currently being expanded).................................................. 8
2.4.3
February 2010 Audit ............................................................................................................. 9
2.5
MARCH 2010 SURVEY OF STAFF ON THEIR USE OF BLACKBOARD ............................................. 10
2.6
OUT OF SCOPE ............................................................................................................................. 10
2.7
WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE (WBS) ................................................................................... 10
2.8
CONSTRAINTS ............................................................................................................................. 10
2.9
ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................................................. 10
3
PROJECT TIME SCHEDULE ....................................................................................................... 10
3.1
4
PROJECT COSTS ............................................................................................................................ 10
4.1
5
PLAN ........................................................................................................................................... 13
RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN........................................................................................................ 13
8.1
9
PROJECT ORGANISATIONAL CHART............................................................................................ 11
RESPONSIBILITY ASSIGNMENT MATRIX ..................................................................................... 11
PROJECT SPONSOR ...................................................................................................................... 11
PROJECT MANAGER .................................................................................................................... 11
PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS .......................................................................................................... 12
QUALITY VERIFIERS.................................................................................................................... 13
COMMUNICATIONS PLAN.......................................................................................................... 13
7.1
8
QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROCESS ............................................................................................. 11
PROJECT ACCOUNTABILITIES ................................................................................................ 11
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
7
BUDGET SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 10
QUALITY MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................... 11
5.1
6
SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................................... 10
RISK ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................................................... 13
PROJECT CONTROL..................................................................................................................... 13
9.1
9.2
PROGRESS REPORTING ................................................................................................................ 13
CHANGE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................. 13
10
APPENDIX A PAGE1 – TASK, SCHEDULE & GANTT CHART ...................................... 14
11
APPENDIX A PAGE 2 – TASK, SCHEDULE & GANTT CHART ..................................... 15
12
APPENDIX B – PROJECT ORGANISATIONAL CHART .................................................... 16
13
APPENDIX C – DRAFT QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR PHASE 1 ONLY ........ 17
14
APPENDIX E – RESPONSIBILITY ASSIGNMENT MATRIX ............................................. 18
15
APPENDIX F – COMMUNICATION PLAN ............................................................................ 19
16
APPENDIX G – RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN ....................................................................... 21
16.1
LEGEND FOR THE RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................................................. 25
File name: Document1
Page 3 of 27
17
APPENDIX G – RESPONSES FROM SURVEY ON THE USE OF BLACKBOARD......... 26
File name: Document1
Page 4 of 27
1 Introduction
1.1 About this Document
This document provides a plan for the management of the Framework for online, flexible and
blended learning in Science and Engineering project.
1.2 Background
This project was a consequence of the following problem or opportunity:
The Faculty of Science and Engineering is embarking on a project that will define a strategy and
focus for blended learning for 2010 through 2011. The aim is to ensure consistent, quality online
learning spaces accessible to local, national and international students.
This will be achieved by developing every unit in Science and Engineering to meet a defined
minimum standard within an agreed framework for blended online learning while, at the same
time, enabling innovators to extend students’ learning opportunities.
The Faculty is responding to a number of imperatives that will have an impact upon the delivery
of its learning programs:
 most undergraduate courses in the Faculty have undergone comprehensive C2010 course
review and revised curriculum will be in place by 2010;
 the Faculty is implementing a range of strategies to reduce student attrition, particularly the
first-year student cohort;
 the Faculty is developing its web presence with a view to developing a strong brand market
identity, and this needs to be reflected in the Faculty’s learning materials;
 a risk mitigation strategy (AUQA recommendation) will require all units to have an online
presence;
 some areas within the Faculty already make strong use of web-enabled learning
opportunities and these need to be delivered within the same framework.
These imperatives provide an appropriate incentive for the Faculty to review more closely its
blended learning strategy and make adjustments to ensure its long-term effectiveness and
sustainability.
.
1.3 Project Sponsor
The Project Sponsor for this project is Prof Robyn Quin, DVC Education
1.4 Project Manager
The Project Manager for this project is Michael Williams (MSc. Project Management, Curtin)
1.5 Key Stakeholders
The key stakeholders of this project include:






Faculty of Science and Engineering Teaching and Learning Committee, through its
online learning development sub-committee.
Flexible Learning sub-committee
Faculty of Science and Engineering’s Online Learning Developer
Blackboard Advisor
School of Regional, Remote and eLearning
Faculty of Science and Engineering Academics
File name: Document1
Page 5 of 27
2 Project Scope
2.1 Strategic Link
This project specifically contributes towards to the following strategic objective(s):
The purpose of this Project aligns with the Flexible Learning Policy:
The University is committed to providing a student-centred learning environment that is
acknowledged for high-quality teaching that enhances their overall learning experience.
The University encourages Teaching Areas to provide Flexible Learning opportunities and
develop learner-centred delivery methodologies that will meet the needs of a diverse student
population who may be restricted by situation, location, learning style, background, prior
experience and/or culture.
This major project is aligned with Objective 5 of the Flexible Learning Operational Plan
 New communication technologies enrich learning and provide students with access to a
wide range of contemporary learning resources and opportunities
2.2 Project Benefits
The expected benefits and impacts of the project deliverables are:





A transition strategy and activity timeline that will ensure that all online units are at a
minimum standard in a managed and quality assured process.
An assessment of the current and future needs for accommodating innovative online
solutions to complement/replace traditional physical teaching spaces e.g. laboratories.
A more general professional development strategy that will include:
o Collaborative development of learning opportunities for students which encourage
them to explore, experiment and reflect;
o Defining minimum benchmarks for all online units to provide rich learning
experiences;
Assisting staff with appropriate access to professional development in design, development,
delivery and facilitation of flexible curricula.
A consistent brand and image that will be used on all the Faculty’s learning materials and
resources (specifically, a standard template that will be embedded when a unit is created in
Blackboard).
2.3 Project Deliverables
The project’s key deliverables are:




All units will have a minimum LMS presence (to level 1 or higher) by end of semester 2 2011
Units will have the capacity to be delivered online, wherever and whenever possible, in
ways that foster and support different web-enabled learning opportunities (inc. different LMS
if required).
Staff within the Faculty will have supportive networks and enhanced abilities to develop their
own learning materials.
Performance outcomes for the Project will be measured using a case study approach i.e.
before/after scenarios, staff and student satisfaction, unit efficiency measures (e.g.
student/staff ratios), retention, course satisfaction, and improvements in learning outcomes
(e.g. through eVALUate, CASS and other measures).
File name: Document1
Page 6 of 27


A consistent brand and image (as much as practical) for the Faculty LMS units established
and available as a LMS template.
All appropriate learning materials across the Faculty will be readily accessible to students in
an online learning environment with a style, brand and method of engagement that is
consistent across the Faculty.
2.4 Project Methodology
Currently the Faculty has few fully online units – some in Chemical Engineering and a few in
post graduate programs. There are some units delivered in two modes, both face-to-face and
online; the extent to which the online presence is any more than content delivery is unknown.
Many units have little or no online presence.
The faculty has developed a three-level* approach to categorising online units and has planned
targets for the next two years (*this has since been expanded to five levels to capture units that
have little or no online presence).
Level
Descriptor
0
Unit not on Blackboard
0+
Unit on Blackboard, but contains either very little, irrelevant or no data
1
Unit on Blackboard and uses any of: Link to Unit Outline; Lecture notes;
Discussion Boards; passive iLectures (as appropriate for the particular unit)
2
Meets Level 1 and uses additional Blackboard tools (eg Drop Boxes, Electronic
Marking, Calendar, Group Pages, External Links)
3
Meets Level 1 and facilitates metacognitive, collaborative and problem based
learning strategies that enhance, extend or replace face-to-face experiences.
Level 1 is considered a minimal standard for all units in the Faculty. At this level many of the
administrative tasks can be streamlined. Level 2 improves the communications between
students, tutors and lecturers. This can be achieved by using discussion groups for specific
topics within a unit; setting up group pages for collaborative work; emailing groups within the
unit; and/or adding FAQs. Level 3 focuses on pedagogy rather than technology; the online
facilities function as mindtools in addition to productivity tools, as defined by Jonassen (1996).
The focus is on developing pedagogy; attainment of Level 3 does not require Level 2:
Level 2
Level 0
Level 1
Level 3
Level 0+
File name: Document1
Page 7 of 27
2.4.1 Project Approach (to be revised after Phase 1 of Project)

Present the current “state of play” to Schools/Departments

Discuss, in general terms, what is required to move to Level 1 and 2.

Point out benefits of moving to Levels 1/2 (consistent online appearance of units across
the faculty; quick links to various materials in one convenient location; assignment
tracking; improved communications between student:student and teacher:student)

Outline help available to academic staff (group training via LMS Support; 1:1 training via
the Online Educational Developer; 24/7 online help manual)

Outline development of a “common unit” that will contain links to information relevant to
all students (plagiarism, assessment etc.)

Gain commitment from Heads of Schools and Heads of Departments to working with this
project to ensure cooperation from their academic staff.

Getting commitment will require convincing academic staff that there is real benefit for
them (and their students) in improving their delivery of course materials via flexible and
blended methods. This will be vital to the whole project when considered against
comments and responses received from the survey on Blackboard use 9Refer to
Appendix 17). Overall there was a very negative feeling towards Blackboard as the
official LMS.

Discuss moving to Level 3 – more about changing pedagogy than using more “bells &
whistles”. Use examples (e.g. Pier Cam used by Glenn Whisson to capture/analyse realtime data from Exmouth jetty), Potential tasks (activity-reflection portfolio linked to the
iPortfolio). Emphasis that this will most probably be developed on a 1:1 basis – what
works well for 1 unit may have little use in others, and planning would be at least 1
semester in advance. Ask those interested to approach the Online Educational
Developer individually. Identify those academics/ units that have been recongised as
being ready to move to Level 3.

Relate the Levels to Jonassen’s concepts of productivity tools and mindtools. Levels 1 &
2 = productivity tools (“doing things better”). Level 3 = mindtools (“doing better things”)
2.4.2 Initial milestones and timeline (currently being expanded)
By the end of 2011:

1000 units will be at Level 1 or higher

500 units will use at least four Level 2 components

1 unit per course will be at Level 3 (approx 100 units)
File name: Document1
Page 8 of 27
2.4.3 February 2010 Audit
The current breakdown of units at different Levels is shown in the next 3 tables. Note that there
is a lag phase between changing the ownership of units, and this change being updated in
Student 1. These tables reflect the position at 11th February 2010 and will be updated
periodically.
Faculty
Science & Engineering
School
Chemical & Petroleum
Engineering
Civil & Mechanical
Engineering
Electrical Engineering &
Computing
Engineering Operations
Science
Western Australian
School of Mines
Department
Chemical Engineering
Petroleum Engineering
Civil Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Computing
Electrical and Computer
Engineering
Engineering Foundation
Year
Engineering Operations
Chemistry
Environment & Agriculture
Imaging & Applied
Physics
Mathematics & Statistics
School of Science
Science and Mathematics
Education Centre
Applied Geology
Exploration Geophysics
Minerals Engineering and
Extractive Metallurgy
Mining Engineering
Spatial Sciences
Western Australian School
of Mines
0 (%)
1022 (61)
Units at each level
0+ (%)
1 (%)
2 (%)
35 (2)
604 (36)
16 (1)
3 (%)
0 (0)
0 (%)
Units at each level
0+ (%)
1 (%)
2 (%)
3 (%)
146 (73)
8 (4)
45 (23)
0 (0)
0 (0)
23 (23)
2 (2)
73 (74)
1 (1)
0 (0)
119 (69)
11 (6)
40 (23)
2 (1)
0 (0)
10 (29)
394 (61)
0 (0)
7 (1)
22 (65)
246 (38)
2 (6)
4 (1)
0 (0)
0 (0)
330 (63)
7 (1)
178 (34)
7 (1)
0 (0)
2
0
0
0
1
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
40
106
14
9
48
(%)
(53)
(85)
(31)
(17)
(76)
0+
5
3
0
2
2
Units at each level
(%)
1 (%)
(7)
30 (40)
(2)
15 (12)
(0)
31 (69)
(4)
42 (78)
(3)
11 (17)
(%)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
71 (65)
9 (8)
29 (27)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
15 (88)
2 (12)
0 (0)
10 (59)
63 (65)
160 (65)
0 (0)
1 (1)
3 (1)
7 (41)
31 (32)
82 (33)
0 (0)
2 (2)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
74 (54)
1 (1)
60 (44)
1 (1)
0 (0)
60 (49)
12 (71)
2 (2)
0 (0)
59 (48)
5 (29)
1 (1)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
25 (74)
0 (0)
9 (26)
0 (0)
0 (0)
127 (69)
58 (59)
3 (2)
2 (2)
54 (29)
38 (39)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
31 (72)
0 (0)
12 (28)
0 (0)
0 (0)
57 (69)
39 (44)
2 (2)
0 (0)
24 (29)
42 (48)
0 (0)
7 (8)
0 (0)
0 (0)
10 (56)
0 (0)
8 (44)
0 (0)
0 (0)
[Doing things better]
File name: Document1
(%)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(2)
(3)
[Doing better things]
Page 9 of 27
2.5 March 2010 Survey of staff on their use of Blackboard
A survey was undertaken March – April 2010 to all S&E academics.
The results will be used to improve the delivery of this project and to assist in gaining
commitment and corporation from academics.
General comments on the use of Blackboad within S&E are listed in Appendix 17.
2.6 Out of Scope
The following items are considered out of the scope:


Undertaking conversion of academics coursework documents to a LMS ready format
Provision of Blackboard training workshops when similar are being run by LMS Support
2.7 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
The project tasks to produce the project deliverables are listed in the Gantt chart at Appendix A.
2.8 Constraints
The following key project constraints were identified:


Teaching staff not having appropriate and timely access to professional development
and training in online teaching including Blackboard introductory and more advanced
user sessions.
Teaching staff being unwilling to embrace the advanced features offered by Blackboard
as part of their Teaching & Learning program. This is a key constraint when taken into
consideration with the generally negative comments and responses provided to the
survey on Blackboard use (refer to Appendix 17)
2.9 Assumptions
The following key assumptions influenced the development of this Project Management Plan:


That there is full support from Heads of Schools and Heads of Departments for all units
to have a LMS presence by 2011
That academics will have ongoing access to Blackboard training and technical support
3 Project Time Schedule
3.1 Schedule
The detailed project schedule is provided in the Gantt chart at Appendix A. This is a ‘snapshot’
in time and is being regularly updated. Contact the project manager for the latest version.
4 Project Costs
4.1 Budget summary
This project is a major project funded through Institutional Development of eLearning projects.
The budget for this project includes:
File name: Document1
Page 10 of 27


Project Manager (0.5FTE, GJ06, 2 years fixed term)
Online Educational Developer (FT, ALB06, 2 years fixed term)
There is an additional support sum of $45,000 provided by the Faculty to foster individual,
innovative ‘showcase projects’. The Faculty will also commit some of the Web manager’s time
to provide instructional design expertise.
5 Quality Management
5.1 Quality Management Process
This quality process includes:




Identification of key deliverables from the Work Breakdown Structure that can be measured;
Setting of quality targets that help to guarantee achievement of project quality;
Sign-off by the relevant quality verifier to confirm that the quality KPIs have been met; and
Sign-off by Project Sponsor to confirm acceptance of project.
Deliverables, KPIs and Quality Verifiers are specified in Appendix C.
6 Project Accountabilities
6.1 Project Organisational Chart
The project team Project Organisational Chart provides a visual representation of the project
team and project reporting structure. It is attached as Appendix D.
6.2 Responsibility Assignment Matrix
The Responsibility Assignment Matrix outlines responsibilities allocated to individuals for each
task. It is attached as Appendix E.
6.3 Project Sponsor
The roles and responsibilities of the Project Sponsor include:






Responsibility to senior management for the project;
Endorsing this document to confirm that project scope and deliverables are correct;
Approving changes to scope, schedule, budget and quality;
Reviewing progress and providing strategic direction;
Resolving issues beyond the Project Manager’s authority;
Providing the financial resources and sponsorship for the project; and
Examining the project at completion2 and completing a Project Sign-off form.
6.4 Project Manager
The roles and responsibilities of the Project Manager include:
2
A completed Project Sign-off form is required even when a project is cancelled prior to completion.
File name: Document1
Page 11 of 27








Managing the day-to-day operations of the project to ensure the project deliverables are
produced to scope, schedule, budget and quality;
Monitoring and controlling the Project Management Plan;
Providing status reports to the Project Sponsor;
Ensuring quality checks are undertaken and documented;
Leading the project teams to meet the project objectives;
Undertaking the tasks assigned, as specified in the Responsibility Assignment Matrix (refer
Appendix E);
Authorising project expenditure in accordance with the project budget; and
Consulting with the Project Sponsor and key stakeholders to maintain communications and
keep parties up to date on project progress.
6.5 Project Team Members
The roles and responsibilities of the project team members include:




Undertaking the tasks assigned, as specified in the Responsibility Assignment Matrix (refer
Appendix E);
Reporting to the Project Manager and notifying where deviations in the project scope,
schedule, budget or quality occur;
Undertaking tasks in a professional manner; and
Attending all project meetings, providing input where appropriate (i.e. active participation).
File name: Document1
Page 12 of 27
6.6 Quality Verifiers
The roles and responsibilities of Quality Verifiers include:



Undertaking periodic quality audits as specified in Appendix C;
Reporting quality deviation or non-compliance immediately to the Project Manager; and
Submitting a Quality Verification Report at the completion of each specified check.
7 Communications Plan
7.1 Plan
The Communication Plan examines the key contacts, frequency of communications, and
communication medium to be deployed. It is used to ensure adequate consideration has been
given to consultation and information dissemination. It is attached as Appendix F.
8 Risk Management Plan
8.1 Risk Assessment
The Risk Management Plan, attached as Appendix G, examines risks, rates those risks and
identifies potential treatment strategies.
This plan has taken the report entitled: Risks to Learning Management Systems Operations
(Feb, 2010) prepared by the School of Regional, Remote and eLearning into account when
identifying risks to the project.
9 Project Control
9.1 Progress Reporting
The Project Management Plan will be controlled on a regular basis, by means of completing
Project Status Report to the Project Sponsor on a Monthly basis. The key elements are scope,
schedule, budget, quality and risk, with the control process comprising:




Monitoring and measuring performance;
Comparing performance to this plan;
Reporting on deviations and issues; and
Taking corrective action (where necessary).
9.2
Change Management
Any proposed changes to the scope or quality will be processed as follows:
 Proposed changes will be evaluated on the basis of their impact on the project process and
outcome, and in light of reasonable alternatives;
 Proposed changes will be formally recorded on a Project Change Control report and
submitted to the Project Sponsor;
 The Project Sponsor will review proposed changes, and either accept or reject them; and
 Accepted changes will be communicated to all concerned stakeholders, and project
documentation will be amended accordingly.
-END OF DOCUMENT-
File name: Document1
Page 13 of 27
10 APPENDIX A PAGE1 – Task, Schedule & Gantt Chart
File name: Document1
Page 14 of 27
11 APPENDIX A PAGE 2 – Task, Schedule & Gantt Chart
File name: Document1
Page 15 of 27
12 APPENDIX B – Project Organisational Chart
/’
File name: Document1
Page 16 of 27
13 APPENDIX C – DRAFT Quality Management Plan for Phase 1 only
WBS No.
1.2.1.1 and 1.2.1.3
1.2.1.4
1.2.1.11
1.2.1.12
1.2.1.13
1.2.2.1
1.2.3.1
1.2.4
1.2.5
Key tasks








File name: Document1
Key deliverable and
Quality KPIs
(Criteria for Control & Acceptance)
Responsible Officer
(Quality Verifier)
List and MS Access Database of 
all units and their BB levels
Report on viable/unviable units
with their corresponding levels of
BB uptake
Accurate
and
updateable Graham McMahon
database of all units within S&E. Shelley Yeo
Suitable for using as the baseline
for the rest of the project.
Meet with HOD and HOS to 
discuss project
Produce
initial
report
on
outcomes of 1st round of
meetings and submit to PM and
Dean T&L
Produce final report on outcomes
of meetings and submit to PM
and Dean T&L
Undertake surveys of staff on BB 
use/intentions and training
Develop plan for Phase 2 & # of
the project
Detailed report on issues related Graham McMahon
to the use of BB and other LMS Shelley Yeo
(e.g. Moodle) within S&E. Able to
be used for planning and
decision making for rest of the
project.
Bring together all other key tasks 
and deliverables into a single
report
Completed PMP to guide the Mike Williams
Graham McMahon
rest of the project
Shelley Yeo
S & E FTLC
Produce a completed report/plan Graham McMahon
for undertaking Phase 2 & 3 of Mike Williams
the project
Page 17 of 27
LEGEND
R – Responsible for executing activity
I – Provides input
N - Notified
14 APPENDIX E – Responsibility Assignment Matrix
ID
1.2.1.1
WBS TASKS
PHASE 1 PLANNING
A – Approval authority
C – Consulted
Project
Manager
Online
Educational
Developer
Reporting
Committee
Project
Sponsor
User
Group
Funding Body
Dean T&L
Mike Williams
Graham
McMahon
FTLC
Prof
Robyn
Quin
S&E
Academics
Regional,
Remote and
eLearning
Shelly Yeo
1.2.1.2
Develop a list of all units (viable and unviable) on
Blackboard
Submit list for comment and review
1.2.1.3
Develop a database of all units and their details
1.2.1.4
Produce report on db results
1.2.1.5
Fully identify and categorize tools and
functionality within BB
Produce report on functionality and submit to PM
and Dean T&L
Redefine BB usage categories (esp. levels 2 - 3)
R
R
R
R
R
I
R
C
R
R
I
C
C
N
R
1.2.1.10
Submit DRAFT PMP to T&L Committee for
comment and review
Produce report on levels and submit to PM and
Dean T&L
Rank units against BB categorizing approach
1.2.1.11
Meet with HOD and HOS to discuss project
1.2.1.12
Produce initial report on outcomes of 1st round of
meetings and submit to PM and Dean T&L
Produce final report on outcomes of meetings
and submit to PM and Dean T&L
ID and meet with all Unit Coordinators
I
N
I
R
R
R
I
R
C
I
I
R
R
C
R
R
R
R
I
R
1.2.1.6
1.2.1.7
1.2.1.8
1.2.1.9
1.2.1.13
1.2.1.14
1.2.1.15
1.2.2
Produce initial report on outcomes of 1st round of
meetings and submit to PM and Dean T&L
ID intentions for BB use in 2010 - 2011
1.2.2.1
Undertake survey of staff (BB INTENTIONS)
1.2.2.2
Report on results and incorporate into PMP
1.2.3
1.2.3.1
ID training offered and who has undertaken
training
Undertake survey of staff (TRAINING)
1.2.4
Complete plan for Phase 2 & 3 of Project
1.2.5
Complete PMP and Submit for approvals
File name: Document1
R
R
R
R
I
I
R
I
I
A
N
C
C
C
C
C
I
C
A
N
N
I
C
C
N
N
I
C
Page 18 of 27
15 APPENDIX F – Communication Plan
Stakeholder
Project Sponsor
Information To Be
Communicated
Allow Sponsor to address issues
relating to moving forward with
the project
Frequency
Medium
Monthly
Meetings and Reports
Monthly
Meeting and reports
As required
Group workshops
Keep sponsor informed of
developments and approvals
needed to progress
Faculty T&L
Committee
Ensure support and ownership of
project with the Sponsor
Project Status updates –
activities, key findings and issues
Allow Committee to address
issues relating to moving forward
with the project
Keep Committee informed of
developments and approvals
needed to progress
Ensure support and ownership of
project with the Committee
Faculty of Science Introduce the project and its likely
and
Engineering impacts. Describe the change
Academics
process and outline the benefits.
Presentations to HoS
and HoD committees
Keep informed of initiatives,
progress and developments
One-on-one meetings
Address any known concerns
Requests for feedback
Requests for Training
Flexible Learning
Committee
University T&L
Committee
School of
Regional, Remote
and eLearning
File name: Document1
Project Status updates –
activities, key findings and issues
Monthly
Reports
Meetings
Project Status updates –
activities, key findings and issues
Monthly
Reports
Meetings
Project Status updates –
activities, key findings and issues
and Risk Management
Monthly
Reports
Meetings
Page 19 of 27
Blackboard
Advisor
Requests for feedback
Project Progress
Risk Management
Faculty of Science Requests for feedback
and Engineering’s Project Progress
Online
Learning Risk Management
Developer
File Name: Document1
As required
Meetings
As required
Meetings
Page 20 of 27
16 APPENDIX G – Risk Management Plan
Risk Event
Poor interest or uptake
by academics
Academics being
“compliant e.g. bear
minimum” only to “Level
1”
Likelihood
Conseque
nce
Rating
Treatment Strategy
Likely
Major
Extreme
Communicate the
advantages of using
Blackboard to improve T&L
outcomes to students
Likely
Major
Extreme
Communicate the
advantages of using other
appropriate features within
Blackboard to improve T&L
outcomes to students.
Resources
Requirement
Responsible
Officer
Graham
McMahon
Mike
Williams
Graham
McMahon
Mike
Williams
By Date
Ongoing
Ongoing
Reporting
Requirement
Weekly to
PM
Weekly to
Dean T&L
Weekly to
PM
Weekly to
Dean T&L
Showcase what others are
achieving in terms of
results and student
satisfaction
Review training being
offered.
Identify gaps in staff
members training and skills
Provide 1:1 training to give
staff confidence in using
Blackboard
File name: Document1
Page 21 of 27
Online Learning
Coordinator leaving in
Year 1
Unlikely
Major
HIGH
Provide a fulfilling and
interesting work
environment and culture
that will help ensure
ongoing satisfaction in the
position.
Dean T&L
To project
Sponsor
Provide opportunities for
professional enhancement.
Technical support being Possible
available to staff is poor
and inadequate
resulting in user
dissatisfaction.
Poor communication
Possible
between project
stakeholders
Online Learning
Coordinator leaving in
Year 2
Possible
Major
HIGH
Major
HIGH
Major
HIGH
Ensure all methods and
processes are
documented.
Work with LMS support to
ensure adequate support is
being offered
Examine reasons for poor
communication. Clarify
needs and expectations of
each stakeholder
concerned.
Ongoing
Mike
Williams
Ongoing
Graham
McMahon
Identify other channels for
open and effective
communication.
Identify reasons for
dissatisfaction and attempt
to mitigate
Dean T&L
Ensure all methods and
processes are
documented.
File Name: Document1
Mike
Williams
Page 22 of 27
Review as
part of Risk
Mgt. Report
to Dean
S&E
Weekly to
PM
Review as
part of Risk
Mgt. Report
to Dean
S&E
To project
Sponsor
Excessive scope
changes (out of scope
items)
Unlikely
Major
HIGH
Reconfirm original
approved PMP including “in
scope and “out of scope”
items.
Mike
Williams
Ongoing
Review as
part of Risk
Mgt. Report
to Dean
S&E
Graham
McMahon
Ongoing
Weekly to
PM
Ensure agreement and
formal signoff by the
Project Sponsor on
tradeoffs between “time,
cost and quality” of the
projects results and
deliverables.
Poor preparation by
teaching staff in setting
up/preparing their
Blackboard site
Possible
Major
HIGH
Review training being
offered.
Identify gaps in staff
members training and skills
Provide 1:1 training to give
staff confidence in using
Blackboard
Communicate the
advantages of using other
appropriate features within
Blackboard to improve T&L
outcomes to students.
Showcase what others are
achieving in terms of
results and student
satisfaction
File Name: Document1
Page 23 of 27
Rare
Major
MOD
Project Manager
leaving in Year 1
Identify reasons for
dissatisfaction and attempt
to mitigate
Dean T&L
To project
Sponsor
Dean T&L
To project
Sponsor
Project
Manager
To Dean
T&L
Dean T&L
To project
Sponsor
Ensure all methods and
processes are
documented.
Unclear roles and
responsibilities for staff
working on the project
Possible
Minor
MOD
Review original PDs to
ensure that current roles
are consistent with original
PD.
Communicate clearly the
expected roles and
responsibilities for staff
working on the project.
Unlikely
Project Manager
leaving in year 2
Minor
LOW
Identify reasons for
dissatisfaction and attempt
to mitigate
Ensure all methods and
processes are
documented.
File Name: Document1
Page 24 of 27
16.1 Legend for the Risk Management Plan
Defining Likelihood Ratings
The following table outlines the definition of likelihood rating as applied to the risk assessment.
Descriptor
Definition
Almost certain
Likely
Possible
Unlikely
Rare
Expected to occur in most circumstances
Will probably occur in most circumstances
Might occur at some time
Could occur at some time
May only occur in exceptional circumstances
Defining Consequence Ratings
The following table outlines the definition of consequence rating as applied to the risk assessment.
Consequence
Catastrophic
Major
Moderate
Minor
Insignificant
Project Consequence
Unacceptable effect on project objectives
Major effects on project objectives, requiring significant effort to rectify.
Moderate effects on project objectives, requiring management effort to rectify
Some difficulties experienced, but these are easily managed.
No noticeable effect on project management objectives
Defining Risk Rankings
The following table outlines the definition of risk categorises, determined by combining the likelihood and
consequence of a risk.
RISK FACTOR
Insignificant
Minor
Moderate
Major
Catastrophic
Almost
certain
Low
High
High
Extreme
Extreme
Likely
Low
Moderate
High
Extreme
Extreme
Possible
Low
Moderate
High
High
Extreme
Unlikely
Low
Low
Moderate
High
High
Rare
Low
Low
Low
Moderate
High
File name: Document1
Page 25 of 27
17 APPENDIX G – Responses from Survey on the use of Blackboard
If Blackboard delivery is to be fully functional, the university really needs to push its necessity across the
board so that students don't think it's an optional novelty. It creates a massive headache for those lecturers
trying to use it when we can't convince students to use it. It's also imperative that Blackboard usage and
downloads don't count against students' monthly Internet allocations - what's the point in posting all of these
materials if students can't download them?!
Quizzes are most common stuff ups, and most time consuming to set/change/administer.
Any LMS is just the packaging, not the content nor does it automatically reflect the interest or enthusiasm of
the lecturer. Putting material on blackboard and then counting percentage of units on blackboard/ total
number of units is not a useful measure of effectiveness of teaching. Blackboard can still be used to show
scanned hand written notes "online"!!
Some unit co-ordinators are 'technology challenged' or not interested in Blackboard (i.e. get somebody else,
i.e. admin person) to put content online. Good luck in trying to get everybody 'on the same playing field' Best to involve head of departments I think.
Thank you for your help. I would very much like to improve on the use of online tool but would need a strong
support from your team. Thank you.
Find the 10Meg limit on files to upload to Blackboard restrcitive. Pdfs can by over 10megs and then there
are videos etc. which I find very useful
We seem to have forgotten that content is an order of magnitude more important (and more) than where
students can access material.
I simply upload material to a departmental website - simple and effective.
Aside from the training aspect, I think it is good to have a rapid response to enquiries / problems with BB.
The LMS staff do respond fairly quickly, but I don't like having to send an email or fill out a web form for it. It
is a really unfriendly way to support the software. It would be nice to actually be able to phone someone up.
Anyway, I think it's good you're doing the survey.
Blackboard is a solution in search of a problem. If you want superficial education, it is wonderful. If you want
a deep comprehension, it offers little
Students currently have online access to my unit materials. They seem to be happy with the current
practice.
In Environmental Biology, the secretaries are those managing Blackboard, we simply give them the material
to place on line. Academics have so much administrative load already that learning yet another program
such as Blackboard is not even an option to consider. Academic staff are imposed such programs on a
weekly basis for administration, research productivity, classroom booking, audiovisual booking, budget
management, credit card management, etc. etc etc Too many new programs to learn, too little time. We are
hired to do research but end up spending 100% of the week managing students and adminstration.
File Name: Document1
Page 26 of 27
There are too many steps involved in Blackboard to achieve even the simplest tasks, e.g. file uploading
should be drag-and-drop not five or six steps - especially a problem with multiple files.
Why do you have to click OK again after each task is completed!
We should be using an open system like moodle, greater flexibility and the ability to modify to suit our
needs.
Please can Curtin move to a better LMS, I have it on good authority that moodle is much more user-friendly
and flexible.
Much preferred WebCt
It's annoying not to be able to customise the order in which the units are displayed in Bb. I would like to be
able to put all the Semester 1 units at the top (since we are now in Semester 1) ... and have the others
below.
It's annoying that I can't make an Announcement once, and then select it to be visible in all or a number of
units (this was possible in WebCT). It's annoying to not have a proper file manager. It's annoying not to have
alert icons for Messages and Discussion Board. There are a number of other annoyances, but they'll do for
now.
Cut & paste to email from other applications (e.g. Word) does not work. Should be fixed!!!
My main problem with Blackboard is that if I update unit materials, I must first REMOVE the currently-posted
materials and then upload the updated versions. Please please please add the ability to *overwrite* any
existing files of the same name when uploading.
File Name: Document1
Page 27 of 27